Thread titles in GD starting “Resolved” are just a load of fucking arrogance.
If it’s resolved, then how could we even debate it?
Are aliens green? is a debate topic
“NYPost - Aliens are Green.” Do you agree? is a debate topic.
Resolved: Aliens are green. is NOT a debate topic.
If it’s resolved (for you at least) then fuck off out of GD, why are you there anyway?
Don’t know why other people use it, but when I was in Debate Club in high school, I believe that’s how we presented our topic of debate.
Here’s an online example: http://www.aynrand.org/debate/topic9911.shtml
The topic of the debate is: “Resolved: that the use of Economic Sanctions to achieve U.S. foreign policy goals is moral.”
Now whether the person in question is using that method to sound arrogant, or because it’s how they were taught one presents debating topics, is another matter. I’m not sure I would use that format here but it’s not incorrect to use.
“Resolved” is basically shorthand for “to be resolved.”
The usage is technically correct, but a lot of people appear to me to mean it in terms of “I’m right, I double-dog dare you to try and prove me wrong.”
It does sound arrogant and stupid but it is also unnecessary clutter in thread titles. I hate it when people title their thread in GQ “A really quick and stupid question about something unimportant”. huh?
Thread titles should be brief and concise and the “resolved” part is just dead bandwidth (except in that it tells us the thread was started by a presumptuous pomp).
(Psst, december? “That word you keep using… I do not think it means what you think it means.”)
Frankly, since it’s a standard debate term, I really have no problem with it.
Although I would expect the person using such a term to employ basic rules of debate; providing evidence, responding to rebuttals, and avoiding extra-topicality.
When the person uses the term “resolved” and doesn’t follow thru with the basic rules, then it’s a waste and the person looks stupid.
I never formally studied debate, but I find it stupid that “Resolved” is actually short for “to be resolved”. The shorthand form of a phrase shouldn’t sound like the antonym of what is represents. I don’t care if its been done that way for centuries, that’s goddamn stupid.
In the science of debate the term means an explanation, as of a problem or puzzle.
QtM, former Master Debater.
“There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance- that principle is contempt prior to investigation.”
Herbert Spencer
Precisely.
Speaking to that point, I would like to suggest the following abbreviations.
Fact is short for, “It’s true because someone told me it was a fact.”
Cite is short for, “I think you’re talking out of your ass on this one.”
Re: is short for, “I don’t think my post is long enough, so I’ll fluff it by using parts of yours.” (guilty)
It’s The Pit is short for, “I am a moron.”
I am fatherjohn is short for, “No, I’m really a moron.”
Um, is short for, “I totally need someone to bitchslap me, because I have a fucked-up attitude!”
Please use these wisely.
That is what it is. Along with first affirmative constructive speech, second negative rebuttal, disadvantage, plan meet need, etc. Every topic I ever debated started out, “Resolved.” There is no doubt that the term means “it is anything but resolved.” Quite the opposite, “resolved” to me means we are going to beat this to death dozens of times over the next year. Sorry, I am just the messenger. Don’t shoot me.
Resolved, I never use resolved in my GD topic titles. In this case I really mean resolved.
In this case, I think they picked some far out, intransitive use of the word Resolved so that they could debate about how RETARDED it is! 
Couldn’t agree more on that one.
I suppose it’s too much to ask that we could actually use the terms based on how they actually are used rather than building a nest of paranoid misinterpretations around them.
I was in high-school parliamentary debating for a number of years. My brother is a former national public speaking champion who has debated throughout the commonwealth. Trust us when we say: "Resolved: " does NOT mean, “it has been resolved.” It means, “Be it resolved that,” or, “This is what we are putting forward as a subject of debate.” Perhaps we could adopt the debating abbreviation BIRT to comfort those of you who are just now learning that words do not always mean precisely what you think they ought to and that sometimes there’s a good reason for that.
Heh, I always thought resolved meant that you were starting the debate from the point of view that the title is in fact the assumption, and it’s up to the debaters to affirm it, or disprove it.
Erek
If the meaning of the term is actually the opposite of what it sounds like, then yes, it is too much to goddamn ask. If the only people who are taught that their common sense is wrong and the meaning is actually the opposite of what the general rules of English convey that it means are the small subset of people who took a debating class, then it is indeed too much to ask.
I’m going to have to quote you on this the next time you take a statement as far out of context as humanly possible to make it into denigration of one of your cornucopia of issues versus a harmless colloquialism.
I anxiously await your first transgression. Have a nice day.
Do we then decide not to allow standard debate language in “Great Debates”?
Go for it. Then I’ll recite every single time that “harmless colloquialism” was used as a weapon of social ostracism and a prelude to physical assault, and we’ll see where we go.
Use whatever you want, but don’t be surprised when people think you are an arrogant ass if you start the debate with “Resolved:”, since the majority has not taken a formal debate class.